Joined Cases T‑492/13 and T‑493/13

(publication by extracts)

Schmidt Spiele GmbH

v

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Community trade mark — Applications for figurative Community trade marks representing boards for parlour games — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, Article 7(1)(b) and Article 7(3))

Summary — Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber), 3 March 2015

Procedure — Oral part of the procedure — Lodging of an application to be heard — Timing and time-limit

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 135(1) to (3), and 135a)

Pursuant to Article 135a of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, after the submission of pleadings as provided for in Article 135(1) and, if applicable, Article 135(2) and (3), of the Rules of Procedure, the Court, acting upon a report of the Judge-Rapporteur and after hearing the parties, may decide to rule on the action without an oral procedure, unless one of the parties submits an application setting out the reasons for which he wishes to be heard. That application is to be submitted within a period of one month from notification to the party of closure of the written procedure.

A request submitted in the application is premature in the light of the provisions of Article 135a of the Rules of Procedure and cannot therefore be taken into consideration. According to the scheme and the wording of that article an application for a hearing, and the assessment by the Court of the benefits of a hearing, can only take place once the written procedure is closed and the parties and the Court are in possession of the complete case file and the arguments raised by all the parties, and are thus in a position to decide whether a hearing would be useful. Moreover, lodging of an application for a hearing before notification of the closure of the written procedure cannot be justified on the grounds of economy of procedure since, pursuant to Article 135a of the Rules of Procedure, the Court may, in any event, decide to rule without an oral procedure only after closure of the written procedure and after giving the parties the opportunity to take advantage of that provision.

(see paras 8-10)